Yeah that was likely the intention but it flies in the face of tests. Plus
(if I were Google) it would make sense not to require the @... !  Thx.
On Nov 5, 2013 6:49 PM, "Andrew Phillips" <notifications@github.com> wrote:

> In
> google-compute-engine/src/main/java/org/jclouds/googlecomputeengine/config/GoogleComputeEngineHttpApiModule.java:
>
> > @@ -101,10 +101,20 @@ protected void bindErrorHandlers() {
> >        return MemoizedRetryOnTimeOutButNotOnAuthorizationExceptionSupplier.create(authException,
> >                compose(new Function<Credentials, String>() {
> >                   public String apply(Credentials in) {
> > -                    checkState(in.identity.indexOf("@") != 1,
> > -                            "identity should be in project_id@developer.gserviceaccount.com format");
> > -
> > -                    Project project = api.getProjectApi().get(Iterables.get(Splitter.on("@").split(in.identity), 0));
> > +                    // ID should be of the form project_id@developer.gserviceaccount.com
> > +                    // OR (increasingly often) project_id-extended_uid@developer.gserviceaccount.com
> > +                    // where project_id is the NUMBER;
> > +                    // HERE we also accept simply "project" as the identity, if no "@" is present;
> > +                    // this is used in tests, but not sure if it is valid in the wild.
>
> Ah...so this is added to keep backwards compatibility? I'm pretty sure the
> original intention was indeed to *require* the "@", but that should be a
> separate PR, I guess.
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub<https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-google/pull/9/files#r7440910>
> .
>